Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38405314›Full record

ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology2024

Multicenter Study of Pelvic Nodal Autosegmentation Algorithm of Siemens Healthineers: Comparison of Male Versus Female Pelvis.

Kareem Rayn, Garima Gokhroo, Brian Jeffers, Vibhor Gupta, Suresh Chaudhari, Ryan Clark, Anthony Magliari, Sushil Beriwal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Automatic pelvic bone segmentation for radiotherapy using diagnostic imaging workstation.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Sex-Based Bias in Artificial Intelligence-Based Segmentation Models in Clinical Oncology.Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)) · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Kareem RaynDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.
Garima GokhrooAmerican Oncology Institute, Hyderabad, CA, India.
Brian JeffersColumbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York.
Vibhor GuptaAmerican Oncology Institute, Hyderabad, CA, India.
Suresh ChaudhariAmerican Oncology Institute, Hyderabad, CA, India.
Ryan ClarkVarian Medical Systems Inc, Palo Alto, California.
Anthony MagliariVarian Medical Systems Inc, Palo Alto, California.
Sushil BeriwalVarian Medical Systems Inc, Palo Alto, California.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The autosegmentation algorithm of Siemens Healthineers version VA 30 (AASH) (Siemens Healthineers, Erlangen, Germany) was trained and developed in the male pelvis, with no published data on its usability in the female pelvis. This is the first multi-institutional study to describe and evaluate an artificial intelligence algorithm for autosegmentation of the pelvic nodal region by gender. Methods and Materials: We retrospectively evaluated AASH pelvic nodal autosegmentation in both male and female patients treated at our network of institutions. The automated pelvic nodal contours generated by AASH were evaluated by 1 board-certified radiation oncologist. A 4-point scale was used for each nodal region contour: a score of 4 is clinically usable with minimal edits; a score of 3 requires minor edits (missing nodal contour region, cutting through vessels, or including bowel loops) in 3 or fewer computed tomography slices; a score of 2 requires major edits, as previously defined but in 4 or more computed tomography slices; and a score of 1 requires complete recontouring of the region. Pelvic nodal regions included the right and left side of the common iliac, external iliac, internal iliac, obturator, and midline presacral nodes. In addition, patients were graded based on their lowest nodal contour score. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher exact tests and Yates-corrected χ Results: Fifty-two female and 51 male patients were included in the study, representing a total of 468 and 447 pelvic nodal regions, respectively. Ninety-six percent and 99% of contours required minor edits at most (score of 3 or 4) for female and male patients, respectively ( Conclusions: AASH pelvic nodal autosegmentation performed very well in both male and female pelvic nodal regions, although with better male pelvic nodal autosegmentation. As autosegmentation becomes more widespread, it may be important to have equal representation from all sexes in training and validation of autosegmentation algorithms.

Identifiers

PMID38405314
PMCPMC10885554

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.